SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : GOPwinger Lies/Distortions/Omissions/Perversions of Truth -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (143698)10/28/2008 1:42:55 PM
From: TimF  Respond to of 173976
 
Yes and even when you add in payroll taxes, the figure for the person earning $500K is noticeably higher than for the person earning $42K.

Now $42K isn't really poor, but the gap only grows if you use someone earning less than $42K. For example a single individual earning $9K (who would clearly be poor) wouldn't owe any net federal income taxes (and payroll taxes would stay the same percent, but obviously be a much lower number of dollars)



To: Bill who wrote (143698)10/28/2008 2:41:16 PM
From: geode00  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 173976
 
Warren Buffet complained that he paid a 17.7% tax rate on his $46 million of taxable income in 2006, while his employees paid an average 32.9% tax rate (his receptionist's tax rate was 30%)

ctj.org

Paulson, with a $3.7 BILLION single year income from his hedge fund likely paid a 15% tax rate although I have not seen his tax bill.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News